Richard Grol

Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practice: observational study

Abstract Objective: To determine which attributes of clinical practice guidelines influence the use of guidelines in decision making in clinical practice.. Design: Observational study relating the use of 47 different recommendations from 10 national clinical guidelines to 12 different attributes of clinical guidelines—for example, evidence based, controversial, concrete. Setting: General practice in the Netherlands. Subjects: 61 general practitioners who made 12 880 decisions in their contacts with patients. Main outcome measures: Compliance of decisions with clinical guidelines according to the attribute of the guideline. Results: Recommendations were followed in, on average, 61% (7915/12 880) of the decisions. Controversial recommendations were followed in 35% (886/2497) of decisions and non-controversial recommendations in 68% (7029/10 383) of decisions. Vague and non-specific recommendations were followed in 36% (826/2280) of decisions and clear recommendations in 67% (7089/10 600) of decisions. Recommendations that demanded a change in existing practice routines were followed in 44% (1278/2912) of decisions and those that did not in 67% (6637/9968) of decisions. Evidence based recommendations were used more than recommendations for practice that were not based on research evidence (71% (2745/3841) v 57% (5170/9039)). Conclusions: People and organisations setting evidence based clinical practice guidelines should take into account some of the other important attributes of effective recommendations for clinical practice.

Evidence-Based Implementation of Evidence-Based Medicine

BACKGROUNDnThe slow and haphazard process of translating research findings into clinical practice compromises the potential benefits of clinical research. Most quality improvement (QI) initiatives are based on the beliefs of decision makers rather than on the growing theoretical and empirical knowledge about organizational and provider behavior change. If future QI activities are to improve the translation of evidence into practice, they should be based on an understanding of the different models and strategies for implementing research evidence and the evidence base supporting their use. Evidence-based medicine should be complemented by evidence-based implementation.nnnTHE EVIDENCE FOR DIFFERENT STRATEGIES OF IMPLEMENTING CHANGEnA general framework for changing practice based on theoretical perspectives and research evidence considers a variety of theoretical approaches and their contribution to an understanding of provider behavior change. The framework summarizes evidence from systematic reviews of provider behavior change, which suggest the potential of several dissemination and implementation strategies that are effective under certain conditions. Passive dissemination approaches are largely ineffective; specific strategies to implement research-based recommendations appear to be necessary to ensure practice change. Multifaceted interventions that address specific barriers to change are more likely to lead to changes in practice. PRACTICAL, FIVE-STAGE FRAMEWORK: A practical, five-stage framework for changing practice, which is illustrated with experiences from a comprehensive program on implementing evidence-based clinical guidelines in primary care, includes development of a concrete proposal for change; analysis of the target setting and group to identify obstacles to change; linking interventions to needs, facilitators, and obstacles to change; development of an implementation plan; and monitoring progress with implementation.

A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON PATIENT PRIORITIES FOR GENERAL PRACTICE CARE. PART 1: DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH DOMAIN

To make health care more responsive to patient needs, insight into patient priorities is needed. A systematic literature review, using electronic and manual searches, was made of studies on patient priorities with regard to primary health care. Data-extraction was performed by two researchers, followed by systematic analyses of study features. 57 studies were included. The aspects of care and methods used showed a wide variation. Aspects most often included were informativeness, humaneness and competence/accuracy. Based on an analysis of 19 studies, the following aspects were seen by patients as most important in more than 50% of the studies that included them: humaneness, competence/accuracy, patients involvement in decisions, time for care, other aspects of availability/accessibility, informativeness, exploring patients needs, other aspects of relation and communication and availability of special services.

Organizational culture, team climate and diabetes care in small office-based practices.

BackgroundRedesigning care has been proposed as a lever for improving chronic illness care. Within primary care, diabetes care is the most widespread example of restructured integrated care. Our goal was to assess to what extent important aspects of restructured care such as multidisciplinary teamwork and different types of organizational culture are associated with high quality diabetes care in small office-based general practices.MethodsWe conducted cross-sectional analyses of data from 83 health care professionals involved in diabetes care from 30 primary care practices in the Netherlands, with a total of 752 diabetes mellitus type II patients participating in an improvement study. We used self-reported measures of team climate (Team Climate Inventory) and organizational culture (Competing Values Framework), and measures of quality of diabetes care and clinical patient characteristics from medical records and self-report. We conducted multivariate analyses of the relationship between culture, climate and HbA1c, total cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and a sum score on process indicators for the quality of diabetes care, adjusting for potential patient- and practice level confounders and practice-level clustering.ResultsA strong group culture was negatively associated to the quality of diabetes care provided to patients (β = -0.04; p = 0.04), whereas a more balanced culture was positively associated to diabetes care quality (β = 5.97; p = 0.03). No associations were found between organizational culture, team climate and clinical patient outcomes.ConclusionAlthough some significant associations were found between high quality diabetes care in general practice and different organizational cultures, relations were rather marginal. Variation in clinical patient outcomes could not be attributed to organizational culture or teamwork. This study therefore contributes to the discussion about the legitimacy of the widespread idea that aspects of redesigning care such as teamwork and culture can contribute to higher quality of care. Future research should preferably combine quantitative and qualitative methods, focus on possible mediating or moderating factors and explore the use of instruments more sensitive to measure such complex constructs in small office-based practices.

Asthma education tailored to individual patient needs can optimise partnerships in asthma self-management.

This paper studies the effects of patient education, tailored to individual needs of patients as part of an asthma self-management program. A tailored education program was designed which took into account individual information needs of patients by using a feedback instrument. Totally 98 steroid dependent asthmatics entered the tailored education program, 95 patients received usual care. Outcome measures were information exchanged and patient satisfaction. Study duration was 6 months. Patients in the tailored education group showed a significant reduction in information need (P=0.005). Patient satisfaction increased from 87.9 to 93.7 in this group while this did not change in the usual care group (P=0.000). Use of this tailored education program improved the GP-patient interaction within the context of a clinically effective asthma self-management program. Findings from this study may be applicable to other chronic conditions as well.

Which aspects of general practitioners' behaviour determine patients' evaluations of care?

This qualitative study explored those behaviours of a general practitioner which were used by patients in their evaluations of 14 aspects of general practice care. Thirty patients were interviewed immediately after visiting their general practitioner. Interview transcripts were analyzed by two authors, who independently marked general practitioners behaviours used by patients. Then, these text fragments were categorised into task or affective behaviours according to an existing taxonomy of doctor behaviour in consultations. The results showed that patients reported using task oriented behaviours when they evaluated task oriented aspects of general practice care. However, when they evaluated affective aspects they reported using both affective behaviours and task behaviours, although the latter to a lesser extent. The evaluations of tell you all you wanted to know about your illness, explain the purpose and the course of the treatment, pay attention to your feelings and kind and attentive are clearly linked to specific general practitioners behaviour. Therefore, evaluations of these aspects can be interpreted straightforwardly. Evaluation of the aspects GP understands you, having faith in your GP and were you involved in decisions about your medical treatment? were based on a large variety of physician behaviours which may lead to interpretation problems. Thus, this study gives some important considerations for a better understanding of patients evaluations of general practice care.

What do students actually do on an internal medicine clerkship? A log diary study

There are limited data on the amount of time students spend on teaching and learning while on internal medicine clerkships, and existing data suggest a wide international variation. Community‐based teaching of internal medicine is now widespread; but its strengths and weaknesses compared to traditional hospital based teaching are still unclear.

Improving patient adherence to lifestyle advice (IMPALA): a cluster-randomised controlled trial on the implementation of a nurse-led intervention for cardiovascular risk management in primary care (protocol)

BackgroundMany patients at high risk of cardiovascular diseases are managed and monitored in general practice. Recommendations for cardiovascular risk management, including lifestyle change, are clearly described in the Dutch national guideline. Although lifestyle interventions, such as advice on diet, physical exercise, smoking and alcohol, have moderate, but potentially relevant effects in these patients, adherence to lifestyle advice in general practice is not optimal. The IMPALA study intends to improve adherence to lifestyle advice by involving patients in decision making on cardiovascular prevention by nurse-led clinics. The aim of this paper is to describe the design and methods of a study to evaluate an intervention aimed at involving patients in cardiovascular risk management.MethodsA cluster-randomised controlled trial in 20 general practices, 10 practices in the intervention arm and 10 in the control arm, starting on October 2005. A total of 720 patients without existing cardiovascular diseases but eligible for cardiovascular risk assessment will be recruited.In both arms, the general practitioners and nurses will be trained to apply the national guideline for cardiovascular risk management. Nurses in the intervention arm will receive an extended training in risk assessment, risk communication, the use of a decision aid and adapted motivational interviewing. This communication technique will be used to support the shared decision-making process about risk reduction. The intervention comprises 2 consultations and 1 follow-up telephone call. The nurses in the control arm will give usual care after the risk estimation, according to the national guideline.Primary outcome measures are self-reported adherence to lifestyle advice and drug treatment. Secondary outcome measures are the patients perception of risk and their motivation to change their behaviour. The measurements will take place at baseline and after 12 and 52 weeks. Clinical endpoints will not be measured, but the absolute 10-year risk of cardiovascular events will be estimated for each patient from medical records at baseline and after 1 year.DiscussionThe combined use of risk communication, a decision aid and motivational interviewing to enhance patient involvement in decision making is an innovative aspect of the intervention.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN51556722

Setting a standard for performance assessment of doctor-patient communication in general practice

Contextu2002 Continuing professional development (CPD) of general practitioners.

Prescribing indicators: Development and validation of guideline-based prescribing indicators as an instrument to measure the variation in the prescribing behaviour of general practitioners

BackgroundDifferences in prescribing behaviour among general practitioners (GPs). AimTo formulate and validate clinical prescribing indicators based on general practice guidelines. DesignValidatory study. SettingPharmacies and general practices in the Netherlands in 2003. ParticipantsA total of 379 pharmacies, 947 general practices and 3.8xa0million patients. MethodsA total of 51 potential indicators were formulated, based on medicinal recommendations from the evidence-based guidelines of the Dutch College of General Practitioners and the corresponding recommendations from the Commission Pharmaceutical Help of the Health Care Insurance Board. These indicators were submitted to an expert panel to assess content validity. The panel assessment was analysed using the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method (RAM). Then, for the remaining indicators, it was assessed to what extent these could be used to determine the prescribing behaviour of GPs and the level to which this behaviour varies among GPs. This was done using a prescribing analyses and cost (PACT) database that was compiled from prescription databases from 379 pharmacies, with all prescriptions from 1,434 GPs over an entire year to 3.8xa0million patients. ResultsThe panel considered 34 of the 51 potential indicators to be valid with respect to providing an adequate reflection of the central recommendations in the guideline and in terms of relevance with respect to health gain and/or efficiency. Of these 34 indicators, 20 revealed considerable differences in the prescribing behaviour of GPs. ConclusionOn the basis of existing general practice guidelines, 20 prescribing indicators could be formulated that were assessed by an expert panel to be sufficiently valid and which could also discriminate the prescribing behaviour of GPs as reflected in the prescription databases of pharmacies.